Gaming Can it play Crysis 3?

Those of you who care more about the graphics than the game, can you not just get loads of pretty demos to look at?

Im also serious - dishonored runs perfectly on my pc and I have xfire 6670 HDs which doesn't have a patch on some of the newer cards. It got 99% here and good reviews everywhere. Games don't need amazing graphics to be good, they need amazing story lines and game play.

 

Well said. I've be complaining about the games industry's style of substance position for ages now, so it's very satisfying to see a title like Dishonored, without the latest graphics tech, show us that great games still exist.

It isn't perfect - there are a few minor glitches and hiccups - but I would still score it 90-95%. I understand Joe's love of the game, but 99% leaves very little room for error.

 

I not upgraded yet from my gtx 480 yet as no one has wanted to buy the pc off me yet (may have to be forced into buying an gtx480 or 580 soon as think me video card is failing as chrome and world of tanks randomly crash now)

but I agree I do not need to upgrade yet even my i-7 920 @ 3.5ghz handles games fine

 

That 99% was just Joe sticking two fingers up at convention. I don't think he intended for us to take it all that seriously.

 

Irony is hardly a good reason to give a game its score.

 

Pat of the reason I persevere at some games is because of how it did in reviews so I hope they are accurate - which im sure they are

 

It was another way of saying "I really, really loved that." Scores are entirely subjective, would Joe having given this game 91% instead of 99% really have altered the number of sales amongst the readership? Nope. Neither would any other score over about 85%.

I believe that was the point, that scores are pretty meaningless in the scheme of things. Think of it as an A+ and you might find it more palatable.

 

That was the end of it for me too. I went years and thousands of dollars trying to keep up with the tech. But my bubble was burst, not only over Crysis but how many of the games that I wanted to play were only on the consoles. Like you, I bought a PS3 and my at the time cutting edge Core 2 Quad/GTX 9800 rig got demoted to web system. It was only last week that I finally built a new system based on the current tech (i7 3770k, Asus Maximus V Gene, Asus GTX 550 ti) I have Borderlands 2 to thank for that (and the death of my old Core 2 Q)

 

CD Projekt red's new game also looks promising.

 

http://techreport.com/review/21404/crysis-2-tessellation-too-much-of-a-good-thing

I read this article just now. It's pretty old at this stage. But when you read through you see the shear wastefulness of gpu usage in crysis 2, based on tessellation alone. It also doesn't bring a huge visual advantage (holy tessellated concrete barrier batman!) One wonders how bad other graphical elements of the game have been optimised.

There is also this video


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5WGGCFj7Dk

which shows the not huge differences between fully max and absolute bottom. The most obvious difference comes from the low res and lack of AA. If you knocked the res up to 1080p how bad with the aliasing be at that stage?

It seems as though the whole thing is a deliberate effort to slow down the gpu to keep pc gamers happy. Or sell graphics cards.

This is something I've long suspected. That once you move past medium settings on your pc you end up with you GPU doing crazy image processing things, which bring little to the table visually.

I suspect crysis 3 will have more of the same shenanigans.

 

You must have been dreaming about a console, or IHS is not giving you glasses.
The max length of a card upgrade cycle is 18 months, 3 years is an absurd statement.

You are not running all the major titles, and I doubt you can run in dx11 with any acumen.
You had the right idea with every 12 months, but you budgeted too little.
I budget 2000$ a year and can build a system and get a new card every 12 to 15 months.

Console HERETIC!!! You have left the green pastures of PC Gaming for the bubblegum chewing, Mt Dew drinking backwards non-gaming platform that is the console. I hope the Gaming Gods redeem you, I certainly will not.

Not enough, see above. Gaming is extremely cheap as a hobby, go check out how much Golf costs. You will come running back and buy TWO Titans and 3 screens.

8800 GTX was one of my favorite cards to have, but I do not know why the author of this article doesnt realize that Crysis played just fine with TWO 8800GTXs (still not at ultra, but butter smooth)

Indeed, there are the Wise and then there are the Negative Nancies who will not spend $650 on a card that is awesome (see the silly BT review of the new Mini-Titan)

It is not the only game, which is why you want to have a solid rig for EVERY game!!

You are planning on playing Civ5 for a while then.

BT and Game reviews should be taken like the statements of GW Bush and Sarah Palin, nod at the insanity and laugh at them.

All in all there were too many just WRONG comments to answer them all (I need to get gaming this afternoon), so I picked out the main themes. If you cna not afford $2000, or even $1000 a year on your hobby, you need to push the chair back and get a better job. PC Gaming is EXTREMELY inexpensive, when you can easily spend 30 to 50 hours a week on Gaming for only $2000 dollars a year, do the math, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks, comes out to a dollar an hour for top end, 50 cents an hour for middle of the road.

enjoy the show

Yours in Elite Military Gaming Plasma,
Star*Dagger

 

Why are you even here?

Bumping articles that have been dormant for months just to bitch about the site and its users really isn't cool.

 

It's ok, it's 'tards like him that make the majority of us look level-headed and 'normal' by comparison.

So, please Star, keep it up! You're making me look good!!!